Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Fixes #4247: remove unnecessary nullptr checks #4248

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 23, 2024
Merged

Fixes #4247: remove unnecessary nullptr checks #4248

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
295468a
Fixes #4247: remove unnecessary nullptr checks
hribz May 23, 2024
327c131
Add nullptr check in for statement of function RecodeBeamSearch::Cont…
stweil May 23, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
12 changes: 5 additions & 7 deletions src/lstm/recodebeam.cpp
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -898,15 +898,13 @@ void RecodeBeamSearch::ContinueContext(
int length = LengthFromBeamsIndex(index);
bool use_dawgs = IsDawgFromBeamsIndex(index);
NodeContinuation prev_cont = ContinuationFromBeamsIndex(index);
for (int p = length - 1; p >= 0; --p, previous = previous->prev) {
while (previous != nullptr &&
(previous->duplicate || previous->code == null_char_)) {
for (int p = length - 1; p >= 0 && previous != nullptr; --p) {
while (previous->duplicate || previous->code == null_char_) {
previous = previous->prev;
}
if (previous != nullptr) {
prefix.Set(p, previous->code);
full_code.Set(p, previous->code);
}
prefix.Set(p, previous->code);
full_code.Set(p, previous->code);
previous = previous->prev;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I added this statement here because otherwise the for statement would have required a line break.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I added this statement here because otherwise the for statement would have required a line break.

I think placing previous = previous->prev here or within the for statement is equivalent.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes.

}
if (prev != nullptr && !is_simple_text_) {
if (top_n_flags_[prev->code] == top_n_flag) {
Expand Down
Loading